ecotourism social and human capitals and identity in tapajos brazil

8/13/2019 Ecotourism Social and Human Capitals and Identity in Tapajos Brazil

1/24

Lima, I.B de; dHauteserre, A.M. Ecotourism, social and human capitals, and identityvalorization: the communities of Tapajs (PA), Brazil.Revista Brasileira de Ecoturismo ,So Paulo, v.4, n.2, 2011, pp.250-273.

ABSTRACT

This article deals with the role of community-based ecotourism for strengtheninghuman and social capitals as well as for enhancing culture and forest livelihood ofriverbank dwellers in the Tapajs region, in central Amazonia. The research wasdone based on the premise that ecotourism can be a potential avenue for puttingin evidence local culture, identity and singular lifestyles as while it can contribute tostrengthen the local networks which can result in collective material and immaterialadvantages. The analysis examines the hypothesis that outsiders (the tourists)once they travel to and stay with local communities, they become the primaryagents who are in a position to perceive the main aspects of values, beliefs androutines as particularities of an Amazonian livelihood. Even though the visitorsusually stay a few days in a certain community, they end up paying enoughattention to what the locals tell and do. This way, the tourists involuntarily put thelocals at the centre of their visit, to the extent the locals start realizing howimportant their forest lifestyle is. This argument certainly does not aim at validatingthe spetacularisation of forest people, of their environment and of their culture.

Instead, the authors are rather interested in the processes through which outsiderscan direct or indirectly as ecotourism participants - contribute to improve thequality of life and to raise self-esteem of riverbank dwellers. Some Amazonianpeoples (of remote areas) usually have a feeling of periphery and ofmarginalization, because they do not take part in the developed metropolitanworld. The self-esteem factor gets relevance in an academic debate, because theAmazonian peoples hold a feeling of being periphery and marginal in reason of notbeing part of a developed metropolitan world; and this may cause adverse effectson their attitude and expectations. The investigation has a qualitative approach inorder to produce descriptive data. Open and semi-structured interviews andparticipant observation were the main methods used for getting information fromthe riverbank dwellers.

KEYWORDS: Ecotourism; Social and Human Capitals; Forest Livelihood, Cultureand Identity Enhancement.

Ecotourism, social and human capitals, and identityvalorization: the communities of Tapajs (PA), Brazil

Ismar Borges de Lima, Anne-Marie d'Hauteserre

Pg ina 250 Rev i s t a Bras i l e i r a de Eco tu r i smo, So Pau lo , v.4 , n .2 , 2011 .


2/24

IntroductionIn small communities, with an incipient and less structured economy, an

ecotourism project for example can become the stimulus for positive turns in thedwellers life (JONES, 2005). When locals are fully involved in ecotourism activities,with direct engagement in decision making and autonomy for management, a situationexperienced since the 90s by some communities and villages in the Tapajs regionsuch as Jamaraqu, Maguari, and Alter-do-Cho, they realize the need for certainskills (JONES, 2005) to cope with new realities and routines. Despite Alter-do-Cho iscited, the village is popularly known as a sun-river beach mass tourism, where

Ecotourism, social and human capitals, and identity valorization: the communities of Tapajs (PA), Brazil.

O Papel do Ecoturismo na Valorizao Identitria e no Fortalecimento do CapitalSocial e Humano nas Comunidades do Tapajs (PA)

RESUMOEste artigo busca investigar o papel do ecoturismo comunitrio para o fortalecimentodo capital social e humano bem como para a valorizao da cultura e da vida dosribeirinhos na FLONA e na RESEX, na regio de Tapajs, na Amaznia central. Apesquisa foi realizada com base na premissa de que o ecoturismo pode serpotencialmente um dos caminhos para se colocar em evidncia a cultura e identidadeamaznicas ao mesmo tempo em que pode contribuir para fortalecer as redes locais,trazendo vantagens coletivas materiais e imateriais. Busca-se, assim, averiguar ahiptese de que os visitantes, sendo externos ao ambiente em visitao, e porpermanecerem naquele ambiente no-urbano, tornam-se agentes responsveis poruma mudana de percepo nos ribeirinhos acerca deles prprios, levando-os acompreender o tanto que o estilo de vida amaznico, em reas de floresta pristina, importante para o equilbrio e manuteno daquela sociobiodiversidade. Condena-se,no entanto, uma possvel espetacularizao dos ribeirinhos e de seu estilo de vida.O objetivo entender os processos pelos quais agentes externos a uma comunidadepodem vir a contribuir diretamente e indiretamente - por meio do ecoturismo - para amelhoria da qualidade de vida dos ribeirinhos e elevar a sua autoestima. O fatorautoestima ganha relevncia no debate acadmico, pois muitos povos amaznicos(de reas remotas) possuem um sentimento de serem perifricos e marginais, poisno compartilham do desenvolvimento propiciado pelas metrpoles, isso pode causarefeitos adversos no nimo e expectativas deles. A pesquisa possui uma abordagem

qualitativa com o objetivo de obter material descritivo para anlise. Entrevistasabertas e semiestruturadas bem como observao participante foram os mtodosusados para se obter informaes dos ribeirinhos de Tapajs.

PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Ecoturismo Comunitrio; Capital Social e Humano; Valorizaoda Cultura e Identidade Locais; Tapajs.



3/24

ecotourism is organized by tour operators and local travel agencies, and practiced insurrounding forest areas in that municipality. Alter-do-Cho has approximately 2,000inhabitants, it is situated in an Area of Environmental Protection (APA) which is an area for

conservation and for sustainable activities as set by Brazilian specific legislation; it is about35m distant from Santarm, and Jamaraqu and Maguari are about 60 km away from it(Figure 1).

Figure 1: Tapajs region, Central Amazonia: Santarm city, Marip and Jamaraqu Villages

The terms ecological tourism and ecotourism are used interchangeably, but, insome instances nature tourism is mentioned instead. Nature tourism does not connoteecotourism regarding its complexities and conceptual nuances, but, simply it is tourismactivities in natural environments: forests and bushes mostly. In brief, the definition ofecotourism is not exhaustively discussed in this paper because the general lack of

agreement on a universal definition is well-known (PAGE; DOWLING, 2001, p. 25); it is aworth of note that the literature has many works done on the conceptual approach,featuring ecotourism by insightfully debating it with various interpretations,understandings, and applications, either as an academic discipline or with a tool forregional development, nature protection as well as its social role (NEIMAN, 2009;NEIMAN; MENDONA, 2004; RODRIGUES, 2003; ALMEIDA, 2003; RUSCHMAN1997). According to Souza and Correa (2000), The official definition of ecotourism in Brazilwas provided in 1994 with the publication of the Guidelines for a National Policy of

Lima, I.B de; dHauteserre, A.M.



4/24

Ecotourism (Diretrizes para uma Poltica Nacional de Ecoturismo ) by Embratur, and hasbeen widely regarded and used (SOUZA; CORREA, 2000; BRASIL, 2008):

It is a segment of the tourism activity which uses, in a sustainable way, thenatural and cultural heritage, which promotes conservation and seeks toraise an environmental awareness through nature interpretation, in a way itpromotes the well-being to the populations engaged in it (own translationinto English).

In this sense, it is better to discuss the key assumptions related to environmentalparadigms and human demands; that is, the analysis on ecotourism should include thematerial and immaterial elements which are part of built and natural spaces as well as thehuman perception and appropriation over them (ALMEIDA, 2003; VILA, 2009). Gladwinet al . classify the human demands into three paradigms: technocentrism,

sustaincentrism, and ecocentrism (see Table 1). But, the environmental paradigms areinterpreted as unresolved dilemmas (ALMEIDA, 2003) which make sustainability a hard-reaching goal in conceptual terms. That is why, sustainable development is regarded bymany as an oxymoron, and Redclift (2005) says that the concept of sustainabledevelopment has come of age, achieving its majority after years of the release ofBrundtland report, in 1987, and he inquiries whether it has future or not (p.66).

Table 1: Human Demands and Environmental Paradigms.Source: Authors, 2008. Adapted from Gladwin, Kennelly and Krause (1994, p.883).

Sustainability has been at the core of ecotourism practices (DOWLING, 2001;

WEAVER, 2001a,b, 2005; BJORK, 2007), but on the ground local actors have facedproblems in applying the concept (Lima, 2008). Sustainable development is a complextheory, embedded in competing views about how it should be. Ecotourism is proposed toreconcile part of the problematic relation between occupation of natural areas and humanimpacts (HONEY, 1999). This study maintains that the way in which ecotourism isconceptually envisaged, defined and implemented, must, of necessity, bring all thecontradictions sustainability faces to the fore.

Key Assumptions Technocentrism Sustaincentrism Ecocentrism

Human Role Domination Stewardship Plain member

Humans and nature Disassociation Interdependence IndisassociationMetaphor of earth Vast machine Life support system Mother/Web of life

Resilience of nature Tough/robust Varied/fragile Highly vulnerableNatural capital Exploit/convert Conserve/maintain Enhance/expand

Poverty alleviation Growth trickle Equal opportunity Redistribution




5/24

Ecotourism connotes the idea of remote, pristine backwardness and isolated regions,and it has been advertised accordingly. Isolation implies that the communities andvillages are geographically situated far from relatively urbanized areas; there is a physical

isolation which requires long journeys, but it does not imply total seclusion, because mostAmazonian dwellers and indigenous people have been able to keep in contact via wirelessand radio communication, TV dishes and collective internet-based telecentres asobserved in Jamaraqu. With the current technologies, no human group is entirelycocooned against external influences. As a result, researchers should revise the traditionalapproaches with respect to isolation, mediating culture and unchanged traditionalcultures. To be precise, isolation in the text means remoteness.

Although ecotourism has been hyped as the provider of strong sectorialconnections, endorsed as an option for restraining leakage of benefits outside a localecotourism geographical area, and taken as a fosterer of sustainable development(JONES, 2005), it entails some drawbacks. The capitalist-centric orientation in (eco)

tourism development can turn into an adverse commodification of rural spaces, cultureand lifestyle, since commodification is an integral part of these processes and socialarrangements and therefore underpins the establishment of new ruralgeographies (PERKINS, 2006, p. 243). The commodification of the countrysideideal (MITCHELL, 1998) can be further explained as a cause-effect of cultural and socialdisplacements (NEPAL, 2006), if the involved communities are not properly assisted andthe tour operators have not been regulated and monitored by pertinent authorities andorganizations. Marip, Maguari and Jamaraqu are special cases because they are ruledand abide by an environmental normative framework. In the Resex and Flona there areregulations which establish the limits for human intervention, and the relevance ofprotected areas for ecotourism practices, and the way backward, that is, ecotourism as ofhigh significance for contributing to nature protection, is a synergetic issue extensivelydebated in the literature (ROCKTAESCHEL, 2006; KINDER, 2002; NEIMAN, 2002).

In the 1990s, moved by this notion of commodification of inner land areas, theBrazilian government with support of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) beganan ambitious national ecotourism programme, called Proecotur, to build the needed infra-structure to make ecotourism an attractive sector for business. It would then createsources of income in poor and isolated areas in the Amazonia (LIMA, 2002; LIMA, 2008).Ecotourism is introduced as a symbolic nexus of development, social welfare andconservation (HIGHAM, 2007; BJORK, 2007; LIMA, 2008) with economic promises for thedwellers in the jungle areas of Amazonia. A community ecotourism project does notreplace the role of government and institutions for poverty alleviation neither is it a self-governing systemper se . In fact, ecotourism is mostly reliant on tourists and the moneythey circulate locally (SCHALLER, 1996).

The problem is the way ecotourism has been discursively clothed (LIMA, 2008;WARD, 1997) which raises high levels of expectations in communities that are seldomfulfilled (DRUMM; MOORE, 2005, p. 4), so stakeholders and local actors are disappointedwhen promises are not fulfilled (WEAVER, 2001a; BJORK, 2007). Residents of Mariphave been sceptical about ecotourism because of underpaid guiding services and localartefacts by most tour operators of nearby cities, Santarm and Alter-do-Cho. Tourism

adini, A.A.B; Fermino, E.S.; Hoefel, J.L.M.; Suarez, C.F.S.Lima, I.B de; dHauteserre, A.M.



6/24

seasonality adds to their disenchantment with few occasional tourists appearing for short-stays which do not pay back group and individual time spent on preparations. However,the article sustains Silveiras viewpoint (2005) that ecotourism counts positively for rural

development as it bridges the gap of cultural understanding between well-off metropolitantourists and poor riverbank dwellers in Amazonia. The article does not posit a romanticand naive viewpoint about ecotourism, because as largely discussed in the literature(WEAVER, 2001a,b; PAGE; DOWLING, 2001) even the most well-planned ecotourismactivity involves impacts on nature and culture (HALL; BOYD, 2005).

What makes ecotourism a particular case here are the interactive dynamicsbetween tourists and locals. The case studies show that for hosting communities,presenting their folklore, handicrafts, tales and daily life stories to tourists can reducefeelings of inferiority, enhance identity, raise awareness about the importance of the selfand revive traditions. Tourism can enhance identities if it is planned with a focus onbenefiting an ethnic group (or local community) and with a focus on raising outsiders

awareness about the culture and traditions of a receptive group (LEME, 2009; MELLO,2003; ALMEIDA, 2003). In addition, the locals must be furnished with the means, toolsand skills to deal with tourism activities at a participatory basis in terms of organization andmanagement, including effective interactions between the locals and visitors (LEME, 2009;LINDBERG; HAWKINS, 2001). The Marip, Maguari and Jamaraqu cases serve toindicate whether and how subjective events and interactions between locals andoutsiders in the practices of ecotourism work to improve self-esteem, networks,interactions and associations, human capacity building (EADE, 1998), social cohesion,socio-environmental justice and equity (BECKEN; SCHELLHORN, 2007) within a certaingeographical area. Issues of scale (HALL, 2007) are not applied to this investigationbecause the case studies are managed as self-contained units for data collection andanalysis, thus not being crosscut with macro government initiatives for development andsocial inclusion. Costaet. al. (2009) underline the importance of involving the communitiesand other stakeholders in ecotourism implementation, adding efforts towards theprotection of natural heritage, particularly with respect to the creation and management oftrails.

Ecotourism development is complex (BJORK, 2007; HALL, 2007) and the currentcase studies do not serve as a standardised model to explain similar occurrences in otherregions (HIGHAM, 2007). Each ecotourism project has its particularities and uniqueness,and what is reality and truth in one place, may not be applicable to other areas(GOSSLING, 2007; LIMA, 2008). The efficacy of ecotourism for conservation,development and bottom-up participatory management depends on the integration ofmany elements: norms, regulation, monitoring, funding, fiscal incentives, engagement ofindividuals and institutions, as well as integrated sectorial actions and well-delivered publicpolicies (LIMA, 2008; WEAVER, 2001a; VILA, 2009). Ecotourism, however, is not aprescription for all economic and social limitations faced by peripheral populations.

For those involved in ecotourism activities, economic benefits can introduce newchallenges, with the erosion of traditional relations of cooperation andreciprocity (STRONZA; GORDILLO, 2008, p.459). Within the community, internaldisputes, misunderstandings about the distribution of ecotourism revenues and taxes, and




7/24

about the division of tasks, can disrupt hierarchies and erode local structures (NEPAL,2006) mostly because not all stakeholders are always equally well represented. This couldresult in issues of unbalanced power, unequal distribution of benefits or neglect ofinterests of some party (BJORK, 2007, p. 41), which can make the residents refuse towork collectively and collaboratively. Ecotourism may be therefore perceived as a far-fetched initiative for most locals who may conclude that ecotourism cannot bring themrelevant benefits. The examples demonstrate that emphasis on an economic orientation(financial capital) over other forms of capital (human, social and natural) may cause theopposite of community integration, well-being, equity, self cultural discovery andcoordinated group accomplishments.

Ecotourism implementation is not a smooth and stress free process (WEAVER,2001a, b; WEARING; NEIL, 1999). Neither does it imply that the whole community will bereceptive and participative. Its implementation is in fact a gradual process of assimilationof new routines by the locals, motivation for capacity building, and wishes to get involved.

Moreover, locals need time to learn how to deal with outsiders. For meticulouslyunderstanding these dynamics, the following questions lead the discussion, i) how doesecotourism contribute to ending the Amazonian communities feelings that they arehistorically a marginalized periphery? Issues of core/periphery and marginalization inAmazonia are discussed at different levels and approaches in Pinto (1980), Kitamura(1994), Bartholo Jr. and Bursztyn (1999), and Browder and Godfrey (1997).ii) How doesecotourism contribute to enhance community capitals? The assumption is that ecotourismshapes social practices through interplays among stakeholders affecting positively ornegatively any pre-existing human, social and natural capitals. This article seeks tocontribute to tourism geography by contextualizing community capitals, (eco)tourism andculture enhancement as a fact in Central Amazonia.

The enhancement of social capital can bring spatial and temporal transformations,heightening local communities principles of sharing and of collective learning(PONCHIROLLI, 2000) as well as their capacity building (TALBOT; WALKER, 2007). Ican enable locals to foresee and approach evolving problematic issues which, if leftunattended, could turn into sources of community instability (ALLEN, 2001). By nurturingexisting networks and interactive processes, local actors can be better positioned tomanage social and economic limits and needs. The richness of an organised humangrouping can, among other factors, be measured by this pooling of knowledge and ofnetworks for problem solving (SABATINI, 2008); belonging to networks with informal linkto like-minded individuals can significantly strengthen the position of those actors inspiredand enabled to cooperate for changes.

Interactive processes from within a group or community in rural areas can propitiateviews, behaviour changes and pathways which can become beneficial for integratedregional development (PANELLI, 2006; ALLEN, 2001) as well as for the stakeholdersentrusted with the accountability for sustainable management of natural heritage.Kauffman (1959) introduced the concept of community as a field of social interactions, andwith high degrees of social capital, a preliminary forum for increasedacquaintanceship (ALLEN, 2001, p.120). Tools for conflict resolution can facilitate alivelihood stability which is essential for development.




8/24


9/24

ecotourists, tourism operations in the community. The information and knowledgeacquired as a participant observer was contrasted with the information provided in theinterviews and analysed across the information of texts, a form of triangulation to ensure

the robustness of the data (brochures, pamphlet, fliers, reports, etc).Basically, it is a case study which utilizes research procedures that generate

descriptive data. The approach is exploratory combining different methods for datacollection (triangulation). The inter-method triangulation helped to get varied informationon the same topic to overcome any deficiency of a single-method investigation in terms ofvalidity and reliability. For Lamnek (1995), a case study holds several importantcharacteristics:openness for the researcher (no standardisation that might limit the actionof the researcher);communicativity that is, action and communication form the reality andare recorded by the researcher;naturalism implies that study relations are not artificiallyconstructed models;interpretativity in which social reality is interpreted reality (Carroll,1996). When combined, they allow much more security and flexibility for data collection.

The case study is considered both a data collection method as well as a researchmodel (SARANTAKOS, 1993) because it can provide many of the empirical facts that helpto support arguments as well as validate or falsify theoretical statements. As explained byYin (1994), a case study is an empirical investigation that explores a modern event in real-life context and requires multiple sources of evidence. The Puxirum ecotourism projectwas chosen to illustrate the situational hierarchy of stakeholders and their contextualinvolvement.

Participant observation added substantially to my interviews and analysis. It helpedin three distinct ways i) it facilitated my approach and relationship with locals, building andstrengthening trust; ii) it provided leads and findings that helped to elaborate more well-focussed interview questions; iii) information provided by interviewees could be contrastedon the ground. On other occasions, the opportunity for talks, interviews and sharing aplace as a participant observer allowed me to grasp routines and the social fabric,which otherwise, would have been hard to determine from the outside. The fieldworkinvolved different levels of participant observation. It included staying in local communitiesin the Amazon forest, going on tourism excursions, interacting with local guides, as well asparticipating in seminars, meetings, regional events and conferences.

Social Capital: A Conceptual Approach Social capital refers to societal interactions shaped by relationships, institutions and

norms which construct and weave meaning in peoples lives. It implies an attribute ofindividuals in a social context and the way they transform their participation in networksand in groups into economic gains (SOBEL, 2002; JUDGE, 2003). Social capital consistsof horizontal associations (agencies linked to communities linked to individuals) andvertical associations (across sectors and agencies) and networks that underpin actionsand decisions in a way that facilitates well-being and production. Social capital forexample develops as collective interests prevail over individual ones (PUTNAM, 1995;JONES, 2005). Falk and Kilpatrick (2000) affirm that social capital is the cement ofsocietys goodwill, building up social cohesion through networks and trust for the groups




10/24

deliberate actions.What distinguishes human from social capital is the fact that social capital is

ingrained in the relations between persons and groups rather than inbuilt in the individualsas such (EDWARDS; FOLEY, 1998). The World Bank also differentiates them byattributing nutrition, education and health as determinants of human capital; and socialcapital as a concept that addresses networks, trust and forms of contacts (COLEMAN,1990; COCHRANE, 2005). In fact, human capital constructs individual abilities andknowledge, and social capital assembles networks of individuals that can complementeach other, propitiating socio-economic gains at local, regional and national levels(PUTNAM, 1995, 2002). Thus, social capital can be briefly defined as, societal featuresthat comprise trust, associational activity, and norms of civic behaviour that togetherfacilitate coordination and cooperation for collective benefit (CLERCQ; DAKHLI, 2003p.10)

James Coleman, considered a pioneer in the investigation and uses of the conceptof social capital, defines it as peoples wills to assist each other, being either a group or anorganization, in order to implement and manage projects that target collective interests(COLEMAN, 1988, 1990; DIWAN; SIRKER, 1997). Coleman underlines that, just as otherforms of capital, social capital secures achievements, in a group, community, or in society,that otherwise would not be possible. Personal growth and networks function as bondingties for social cohesion and become critical for societies to prosper economically and fordevelopment to be sustainable. Understanding the dimensions of social capital will enableus to identify converging areas or elements through which networks can positively affect acommunity. In the literature review, some researchers have established dimensionalcharacteristics of social capital (see Table 2).

Table 2: Dimensional characteristics of social capital as seen by key area researchers.Source: Authors, 2006, based on figures available in the literature

Woolcock,1998 Office of National Statistics(ONS) .Source: Franke, 2005.

Liu and Blesser,2003

Narayan andCassidy 2001.

i) Integrationii) Integrityiii) Synergyiv) Linkage

i) Participation, socialengagement, commitment

ii) Control, self-efficacyiii) Perception of communityiv) Social interaction, social

networks, social supportv) Trust, reciprocity, social

cohesion.

i) Informal socialtiesii) Formal socialtiesiii) Trustiv) Norms ofcollective

action

i) Groupcharacteristicsii) Generalizednormsiii) Togethernessiv) Everydaysociabilityv) Neighbourhood

connectionsvi) Volunteerismvii) Trust




11/24

Community Ecotourism ProjectsThe Tapajs polygon (Resex and Flona), Brazilian Amazonia

The chosen cases are located in the Tapajs/Arapiuns polygon, in Par state. Thepolygon encompasses Santarm city and Alter-do-Cho village as well as the communities ofJamaraqu, Maguari e Marip which belong to two distinct Brazilian ConservationUnits (UCs) called Resex, Extractive Reserve of Tapajs/Arapiuns with 677,000 hectares, andFlona, National Forest of Tapajs with 545,000 hectares (refer to Table 3 for socioeconomicinformation). Flona and Resex belong to the National System of Conservation Units (SNUC)which was established on the 18 of July of 2000, law 9985, with respect to legal environmentalpolicies. The SNUC has ten major categories of protected areas which can be created(demarcated) at district, state and national levels. Regarding the SNUC, Brazil has 292protected areas: 126 of them are fully environmentally protected with rigid regulation restrictinghuman presence; 166 have more flexible rules and norms, allowing human settlements andsustainable use of forest resources.

In the Tapajs region, Santarm is by far the largest urban concentration at the heart ofthe Amazonian rainforest, with around 170,000 inhabitants. It is 50kms from the case studieslocated north and south (around 2~6 hours by small power-driven boat known asvoadeira and rabeta ). Alter-do-Cho is about one and half hours from Marip by boat. Tapajs River is thecommunities lifeblood and the main highway which interlinks and serves them. MaripMaguari and Jamaraqu have community ecotourism projects supported by the BrazilianInstitute for Environment and Renewable Resources (Ibama), local and state governments,civil society such asSade Alegria , and by some international donors and partners. Mariphosts the Puxirum ecotourism project financially supported through a partnership between theBrazilian and Finnish governments.

Marip, Maguari and Jamaraqu are regulated and monitored by Ibama. The

communities can only have low impacting activities such as latex extraction, fruit gathering,subsistence agriculture, subsistence hunting and sustainable management of forest resources.A limited number of dwellers are allowed to live in the Resex and in the Flona. They areusually families who were already living in the region before it got the status of ExtractiveReserve. Because the families live in an environmental protection area, they are expected byIbama and the Ministry for the Environment to look after their own environmental assets andforest food sources.

The territory is state land under permanent concession for the families. Most are ofmixed European and indigenous ethnicity. The economy is extremely fragile. The familiessurvive by cultivating cassava, fishing, raising domestic animals such chickens, ducks, pigs,processing honey, producing handicrafts, wood kitchen utensils, straw artifacts, manufacturingecological leather as well as selling flour in Santarm and Alter-do-Cho. The better-offpeople seem to be the retired ones because they have a monthly salary guaranteed by thegovernment which means they always have cash to purchase goods. During the rainy seasonmost families have less available land for crops; consequently they do not have much forbalanced meals, particularly in Marip because it is settled in a strip segment of forest. Someof the families do risk starving as they struggle daily for their well-being. This is because fish -their main source of animal protein - becomes very difficult to catch with the river flowing 10meters above the original banks. In the Resex, large scale agriculture is absolutely prohibited.




12/24

Ecotourism is one of the commercial activities allowed by Ibama in the Resex andFlona. It is statutory that the activity must be coordinated by the native population and isexpected to bring economic benefits to the riverbank families by increasing their individual and

collective assets and income. Visiting communities in the environmental protection areasrequires researchers, tourists and tour operators to apply for an official authorization fromIbama in Santarm. There is a government entry fee of about US$ 3.00 per day. Long termstays for visit, study or research require further assessment and permission because ofpossible impacts on the traditional lifestyle in the communities. Professional photography andfilming incur an additional fee of approximately US$ 30. These fees go to a government fundto buy fuel and equipments to monitor officially established conservation areas such as Resex.

Marip was the community selected out of 68 in the extractive reserve to host anecotourism pilot project. The project is calledProjeto Puxirum de Ecoturismo and has technicaland marketing support from Ibama,Me Natureza tour operator and from travel agencies inSantarm. The project is mostly financed by the Finnish government. Puxirum, which meansvolunteerism in a local indigenous dialect, is a comprehensive programme for sustainabledevelopment in the Arapiuns-Tapajs region and ecotourism is one of its components. Thecriteria for selection were its proximity to Alter-do-Cho, its spectacular landscapes and fauna,and its existing trails.

The Marip community has adopted ecotourism with optimism. The project has createdplenty of expectations. They hope the activity can turn into a steady income source. Thecommunity devoted time and sweat as its contribution to the Puxirum project. In anatmosphere of keen volunteerism, they worked for months to build up a straw and woodenshelter called in PortugueseMaloca for lodging the tourists. TheMaloca can host 30people in the hammock space, has a belvedere and is located in a strategic position. It is onthe main access road of the village, and its two storey structure facilitates appreciation of thelandscape.

In order to start up ecotourism activities, some locals attended guide training coursesmanaged jointly by the Brazilian Micro and Small Business Support Service (Sebrae), a non-profit organization, and by the Brazilian government environmental agency (Ibama). The localsgot together to set up eight trails that cover 98 kilometres as one of the requirements for thecommunity to become part of the Puxirum. As of April 2005, there were nine trained guidesaged 20 to 50. There are no female guides. Usually the women themselves allege that they donot feel confident to take groups inside the forest. They stress that it is better to have mendealing with any unexpected situation (wild animals or accidents) in the jungle areas. Theyprefer to get involved in handicraft and souvenir production, and the provision of basic servicesfor the tourists.

The community economically benefits from ecotourism in two ways. There is a US$ 4.00fee for visiting/entering the community area. The tourists also pay about US$ 4.50 per night tosleep over in theMaloca . This money is kept in a collective community fund for public benefits.Those families that host tourists also get paid for providing food and accommodation. Theguides receive about US$ 12.00 for conducting the tourists no matter the size of the group(usually 6~10 people). Ibama and the community have plans to adjust the guide fees in orderto make them fairer. Tourists can buy souvenirs, handicrafts and home-made sweets, whichsomewhat improves families incomes. The communitys leader and a guide confirm thatecotourism is a complementary earning that strengthens family budgets by up to 40%.




13/24

Table 3: Socioeconomic Information and figures of Tapajs/Arapiuns. polygon, in Par state, BrazilianCentral Amazonia.Source: The authors, 2008.

Location/ Par State,

Brazil

Santarm Alter-do-Cho Maguari

(Flona) Jamaraqu

(Flona) Marip

(Resex)

Population - About 170,000inhabitants

- About 3,000inhabitants(fixed)*40,000inhabitants(floating)

- About 40families/ 240inhabitants

- About 19families/110inhabitants

-45families/270inhabitants

Distance

--

- About 35 km(paved road)*2~4 hours byboat fromSantarm

- 60 km*3~5 hours byboat*4 hours by bus(unpavedroad) fromSantarm

- 70km*4~6 hours by boat* 4 hours by bus(unpaved road)from Santarm

- 60km*No roadaccess*4~5 hours byboat fromSantarm*About 22km

from Alter-do-Cho (1 hourby boat).

Economy -River port, localbusiness, farmingand mineral trade,river transport,food processing,aviary, cerealsstorageand processing,services, publicand private

sectors, localmanufacturing,urban tourism.

-Nature masstourism, fishing,aviary, localtransport,agriculture, hoteland restaurantsservices, publicsector,handicrafts andlocal

manufacturing.

-Subsistenceagriculture, fishing,aviary, hunting,latex extraction &ecological leathermanufacturing,woodworking,natural aromaticoils, honey,baskets, fruit

preserves, andecotourism.

- Subsistenceagriculture, aviary,fishing, hunting, latexextraction &ecological leather,ecotourism.Woodworking, naturalaromatic oils, honey,baskets, fruitpreserves, and

ecotourism.

-Subsistenceagriculture,aviary, fishing,hunting,manioc flourproduction,ecotourism.

Tourismactivity/ attractions

Main tourismgate (river port &airport). River boatcruises. Shopping& traditionalcuisine andhandicrafts. It isSurrounded byrainforest, lakes,lagoons,igaps (floodedforests) andigaraps (lagoonswith crystallinewater).

Surrounded byforests. Igapsand igaraps.Alter-do-chohosts the mostappreciated riverbeach in theTapajs. Thegreen lake is atourist hotspot. Itchanges fromblue to greenduring the day.Piroca hill. Localculture andcookery. Birdwatching. Nativeguides. Picturingwildlife.

Primary andsecondaryrainforest.Long trails. Birdwatching. Sportfishing. Localculture and cookery.Bathing in the lakes.Igaraps & igaps.Typical fruits. GiantSamama trees.Bird watching.Native guides.Picturing wildlife.

Primary andsecondary rainforest.Long trails. Birdwatching. Sportfishing. Local cultureand cookery. Bathingin the lakes. Igaraps& igaps.Typical fruits. GiantSamama trees. Birdwatching. Nativeguides. Picturingwildlife.

Primary andsecondaryrainforest.Long trails.Bird watching.Sport fishing.Local cultureand cookery.Bathing in thelakes. Igaraps& igaps.Typical fruits.Bird watching.Native guides.Picturingwildlife.




14/24

Puxirum Community-based Ecotourism, Cooperation and Social Capital

The major partnership for Marip has been the Puxirum ecotourism project. It hasfunctioned as a catalyst of members attention and efforts. The importance of Puxirum isevident for harnessing community integration and for generating income. The project is theresult of community and institutional efforts to broaden locally their economic and incomehorizons through ecotourism. There are many direct and indirect partners involved in thePuxirum at local and regional levels. However, interaction is sporadic; it mostly happens ina fragmented way, not involving all dwellers. The intra-community networks seem to bemuch stronger than the links the villagers have with outsiders. The reason may be thatcommunity members share opinions and know each other well in terms of personality,behaviour, way of thinking; they share the same customs, culture and identity, and makedecisions jointly over small or major themes on a daily basis.

In Marip, the intra-community networks become a continuum for reaffirming andreinforcing them as a unit - a sense of belonging - with relations based on intense trustand reliability as one of the natives explains their daily life and interaction, we are part ofthis land for generations; we know each other, the families and our next of kin very closely;we have a way of things and this makes us the whole here one supporting the other,because we need it to overcome daily difficulties. Conversely, it was observed in Maripand Maguari that there were levels of anxiety between locals and outsiders when initiatingan interactive process; it was mostly manifested in the form of silences (a refusal by thelocals to talk and interact), shyness and reclusion.

Although the methodology used is not deeply ethnographic, it is possible to assertthat the networks (see Figure 2.0) contribute at different levels to increase human capitalwithin Marip because they bring a variety of benefits to the community. This accumulationof human capital, in turn, makes the networks more resilient and durable. The assumptionis that human capital and social capital are inseparable elements of a family, group,community and society. They complete each other and form the basis for the acquisition ofother forms of capital such as financial, political and intellectual. Each network contributesto strengthen an area of knowledge of the community (JONES, 2005). For instance,Projeto Sade e Alegria is a non-governmental organization with more than 20 yearsworking in the Tapajs-Arapiuns polygon (central Amazonia). It has improved thecommunities quality of life by providing knowledge, techniques, and equipment for thecommunities activity. In Marip,Sade e Alegrias contribution during the field trip was thetechnical and physical support to install the community radio station with speakers on thestreet light poles as well as the two windmills for producing clean energy.

Another example of how networks enrich social capital is Marips connections withlabour and class associations. It has links with the Rubber-tappers National Council(CNS), the Resex Communities Association, Amazonian Agro-Extractive Center (CAAM)and CPT Association. This type of networks helps communities like Marip get informedand updated about issues pertinent to them (Fig. 1). They also favour accumulation ofknowledge when community members productively get together for open discussion onsocial, emotional and subjective issues. This was observed to occur in the Young Groupsand Church. Within their group they feel stronger and can overcome limits while they getothers views before making personal decisions. In fact, these associations becomeforums for debate and decision-making over personal, group, labour and class matters.




15/24

Such networks promote segmented gains directly or indirectly for those linked to them.Networks are the basis for social capital to exist, and social capital functions as a cross-sectorial platform through which decisions are made, advancing regional development and

peoples well-being.

Figure 2: Key networks in Marip. Source: The authors, 2008.

Deconstructing Marips networks has demonstrated how networks help constitutesocial capital and problem solving and how they expand interpersonal trust, optimism andnon-party political participation. The community has a combination of types of socialcapital because of the internal and external dynamics of its networks. Marip retains bothcharacteristics of bonding and bridging capitals with vertical and horizontal links; thecognitive and structural social capitals are intertwined in Marip with on-going cooperationbecause of continuous reinforcement of trust, values, and norms. Marip seems to havemore continuous networks than short-lived ones; this provides the basis for strong socialcapital. It seemed, during the course of my stay, that there was much solidarity among themembers of Marip and this fact indicates principled social capital as well. Its networks arepredominantly within the delimited area of Resex which sets Marip as a circumscribedsocial capital. This aspect confirms that a networked community, supported by civilsociety, can be a changing place, Eade (1998, p.165), understands that,

PuxirumEcotourism

ProjectMarip

Community

MaeNaturezaEco-Tour

TravelAgencies in

Santarem

IBAMA

Tapajoara

CNS

CAAM

CNPT

Saude eAlegria(NGO)

FishermenAssociation

Young

Group

CatholicChurch

GuidesGroup

BaptistChurch

Schools

CommunityRadio

SEBRAE Finnish

Government

Networks in Marip




16/24

A dynamic network is not just a cosy club. Its participants are active and keennot merely to reinforce their existing knowledge and beliefs, but also beintroduced to new ideasTo scale-up or enhance their impact depends on

optimising the effectiveness and efficiency for the benefit of the poorManypeople and organisations draw real strength and confidence just from knowingthat they are not alone in their struggles.

In May 2010, the researcher obtained updated information about the community-based ecotourism. The local leaders (refer to the endnote) indicated that ecotourism wasprogressing, and they informed me as follows:

They have received about 40 tourists per month; Community has full control of the ecotourism project. Tour operators and agencies

are not allowed to mediate business between them and the tourists. The communitydeals directly with the tourists and, consequently, has increased profits.

Maloca was improved and has sheltered tourists as planned by the group. Local production has contributed to family income; Tourists money has circulated in the whole community; locals have improved their

economic assets by selling traditional food, handicrafts, offering their house fortourists to experience their routines and life.

There are four tracks. They are better equipped for supporting tourists natureappreciation and ecological experiences;

Marip has 350 people (60 families) as of May 2010; The natives have mobile phones.

Evolving Human and Social Capitals

Optimism was observed as the main ingredient in the first stage of adoption ofecotourism. In fact, the structural and emotional community changes, when developingecotourism, follow 11 phases which fit within two broad dimensions: anxiety and euphoria.The phases pervade the whole process of incorporating ecotourism activities into thecommunity structure. Each phase in the development process adds to or subtracts fromcommunity capitals, i.e. contributes to enrich or negatively impacts on human, social, andnatural capitals.

Within the conceptual framework focused on human and social capitals, eachmember is considered as an indispensable unit for group cohesion. Ones well-being,learning capacity, esteem, confidence and knowledge become pivotal for the socialequilibrium of the group. In poor isolated Amazonian communities, these subjectiveelements such as esteem and confidence can easily be advanced if locals feel they areimportant to outsiders. Thus, substantial internal changes in a community can occur frompositive interventions by outsiders. This was observed in Marip when outsiders gaveimportance to what locals were doing, saying, manufacturing, fishing, and believing; itseemed to reflect immensely in their emotional responses. Ecotourism development canraise expectations, pulling the trigger for locals to envisage possible changes in their livesfor the better.




17/24

It was observed that, at the implementation phase of ecotourism, locals who wereinterested but did not hold the required abilities and knowledge, struggled to the fullest tolearn the new skills. The effort for improving pushed locals to interact more and more,

strengthening their personal and group networks. Activities that link the locals aroundecotourism development were seen to reinforce existing personal connections (cognitive)that directly reproduce the community level connections (structural). It gives theimpression that social capital becomes a collective asset deriving from many aspects ofpeoples lives and from their associative goings-on (JONES, 2005). Understanding howsocial ties and their dynamics constitute an additional means or resource for individualsand communities, and the way in which they can be accessed and used productively, is anavenue that could have significant public policy impact (JONES, 2005; SCHEYVENS,2002).

Conclusion

The article sought to reveal how ecotourism can become an enhancer of socialand human capitals, local economy and of identity. As for the social capital, it isassumed that, with the implementation of ecotourism projects and activities, the localsocial ties and structures and traditions become even more noticeable for both hosts (thelocal dwellers) and guests (the tourists). Through interactive processes with the tourists, itseems the locals become more mindful of their own culture and of the importance ofnatural landscapes for tourism (and for themselves). This change of perception mayconstructively increase a feeling of belonging in some dwellers to the extent this helpsthem to struggle for the continuity of ecotourism as one strategic economic activity and fornature preservation. Ecological tourism seems to contribute to strengthen the networks ofcooperation and trust in four localities in theTapajs region: Maguari, Jamaraqu, Maripcommunities and Alter-do-Cho village.

When cosmopolitan people come and share space and time with the locals, payingattention to their culture, life-style and environment, a new paradigm takes place:Amazonians in isolated areas gain an inner feeling of social ascension and importanceenhancing both social and human capitals. When the [eco]tourists come to support thelocals in their own environment, to listen to their stories, myths, day-to-day challenges anddifficulties, and set the locals at centre stage during the visit, the tourists have a crucialrole in helping these communities overcome social exclusion and feelings of inferiority.

In this sense, ecotourism development significantly contributes to enhance thehuman, social, and natural capitals in Amazonian communities. This process of hostingtourists makes them feel less marginalized - less peripheral - as they acknowledge that

local values and culture are integral to an Amazonian identity. However, it is underlinedthe importance of planned ecological tourism, particularly to those communities inAmazonia, because rather than strengthening and heightening the embryonic human andsocial capitals, ecotourism can end up eroding them, creating a metaphorical socialtrap (PUTNAM, 2001), besides causing a feeling of frustration and disappointment.

Ecological tourism activities can help to expand income generation by opening upopportunities for services and businesses such as handicraft selling, and ecotourism




18/24

guidance. Disrespectful ecotourists and businesspersons can inadvertently elicit rejectionand feelings of disappointment thrusting the locals against outsiders and against ecotourismitself. A community leader confirmed that, tour operators just come to here to make as much

money as they can, cashing out on us - the weakest side - without giving back a realcontribution to us...we feel like subjugated in our own land. In Marip, locals have askedIbama for fee reviews for their services and for more control over the Puxirum ecotourismproject to avoid exploitation by false eco-tour operators. The case is not exclusive or newbecause many community-based ecotourism projects around the globe have faced thedilemmas and stalemates of weaving together conservation issues and economic ones.

Even though some adjustments and regulation should take place in Marip, ecotourismhas played a role as a capitals enhancer in the community. Ecotourism has instigated locals toimprove their pre-existing capitals at least in the initial stages and improved capitals promotewell-being (ANDERSONet al., 2004; CARPENTERet al., 2004, KOKA; PRESCOTT, 2002).They underline that enhanced social capital can reduce costs of collective actions at the sametime it improves the flow of information, goodwill and motives for cooperation; and it can bringmore investments accompanied by more effective monitoring and enforcement systems. But itis still not clear whether social capital can instigate or not individuals into more sustainablepractices in land management. Since improved social capital results in powerful socialcohesion and networks, these links could be explored to successfully promote environmentaleducation.

The Marip case reveals that coordinators and community leaders should pay extraattention to the stages and issues that present more chances for causing disagreements and adecrease of expectation. In addition, mechanisms, tools and forums should be created forconsensus building, environmental awareness and conflict resolution on legitimacy, finances,rights and responsibilities. The Marip ecotourism project validates the Falk and Harrison(1998) assumption that it is possible to have social capital in the short term as a form ofcapacity building. Ecotourism projects which stress investment in human and social capitals,and prioritize participatory processes, have a pivotal role for equitable and sustainableachievements in development (PRETTY; FRANK, 2000, PRETTY; WARD, 2001; MULDERAet al., 2005).

When communities hold multifaceted networks of civic engagement - what can be calledpurposeful networks in ecotourism development dwellers are more likely to cooperate forcollective gains. In Marip, locals got involved in ecotourism mainly because of the discoursesabout its positive prospects. The possibility of change, the novelty, the chance for learning andshowing abilities, the arrival of groups of tourists and the financial gains pushed them tocommunicate and cooperate much more. Expectations can be nourished through a growingflux of tourists with increasing capital inputs [progressive income generation]. This fact revealsthat social capital really assembles networks of individuals while it augments human capital(individual abilities and knowledge), complementing each other, for socio-economic gains inthe community.

For example, what the Marip Puxirum ecotourism project demonstrates is that the actof building expectations and perspectives becomes the glue for triggering the whole processof reinforcement of the local culture and for promoting inclusions. As observed by Scheyvens(1999, p.247)., self-esteem of many community members is enhanced [with ecotourism]because of outside recognition of the uniqueness and value of their culture, their natural




19/24

resources and their traditional knowledge . Self-esteem becomes the main ingredient to beworked by leaders and project managers who can use it to overcome the most problematicstages in ecotourism implementation, i.e. the constraint, uncertainty, disappointment and

stalemate. If these phases are well-managed, increasing self-esteem and collaborativeattitudes will take place, resulting in a positive scenario for poverty reduction and environmentmaintenance.

Increased self-esteem propitiated by ecotourism activities could be observed in allcontacts with the natives in Marip. In May 2010, the Puxirums community leaders confirmedthat there are ten people directly and enthusiastically involved with ecotourism; they assist thetourists, work as guides and cater for their well-being in the village. According to the localparticipants, Issac, Maria Isolina, Raimundo, Raimundinho, Manduca, and Beto, the greatestthing is that they have complete ownership of the enterprise; the community makes decisionsover every aspect of ecotourism development. The tourism agencies and operators are notmediators in the business as happened in the past

Ecotourism can contribute to reinforce Amazonian identity and culture while reducingphysical and historical (socio-economic) distances between developed urban centers andAmazonian people. Because of its principles and foundations - for many - ecotourism is anexcuse for safeguarding nature. Without pristine green areas, ecotourism loses its mainappeal. Those isolated Amazonian communities attracted attention because they stillpossessed their native environment and cultural idiosyncrasies.

ReferencesALLEN, J.C. Community conflict resolution: The development of social capital within aninteractional field.The Journal of Socioeconomics , vol.30, n.2, p.119-120, 2001.ALMEIDA, M. G. (Org.)Paradigmas do Turismo . Editora Alternativa: Goinia, 2003.

ANDERSON, C. L., LOCKER, L.; NUGENT, R. Microcredit, social capital, and common pooresources. World Development, 30, p. 95-105, 2004.VILA, M. A.Poltica e Planejamento em Cultura e Turismo : Reflexes, Conceitos eSustentabilidade. Editus, Editora da UESC, Ilhus, BA, 2009, p. 1-15.BARTHOLO JR., R.S.; BURSZTYN, M.Amaznia sustentvel : Estratgia dedesenvolvimento, Rondnia 2020. Braslia: Edies Ibama, 1999.BECKEN, S.; SCHELLHORN, M. Ecotourism, energy use and the global climate widening thelocal perspective. In : HIGHAM, J. (Ed.),Critical Issues in Ecotourism : paradoxes,problems and pathways for the future. Oxford: Elsevier, 2007, p. 85-101.BECKER, G. S. Human capital.In: HENDERSON, D. (Ed.).The concise encyclopedia ofeconomics , 2nd ed. Indianapolis: Library of Economics and Liberty, 2002.BJORK, P. Definition paradoxes: from concept to definition.In: Higham, J. (Org.). Criticalissues in Ecotourism Understanding a Complex Tourism Phenomenon. Oxford, UK:Elsevier Butterworth-Heineman, 2007, p. 23-45.BOXALL, P.; PURCELL, J.Strategy and human resource management . New York:Palgrave Macmillan, 2008.

oquette, M.L.T.; Pavan-Filho, F.; Costa, T.J.F.; Carvalho, R.C..Lima, I.B de; dHauteserre, A.M.



20/24

BRASIL. MTur Ministrio do Turismo.Ecoturismo: Conceitos Bsicos. Secretaria Nacionalde Polticas de Turismo. EMBRATUR, Braslia, 2008, 64p. Available online Acessado em 20 de Abril, 2011.BROWDER, J.O.; GODFREY, B.J.Rainforest cities : urbanization, development andglobalization of the Brazilian Amazon. New York: Columbia University Press, 1997.BUCKLEY, R. A framework for ecotourism.Annals of Tourism Research , vol.21, n.4, p. 661-665, 1994.BUCKLEY, R.Environmental impacts of ecotourism . Wallingford, UK: CABI, 2004.CAROLL, J. Escaping the information abattoir: Critical and transformative research in dramaeducation.In : TAYLOR, P. (Org.),Researching Drama and Arts Education: Paradigms andPossibilities. London: Falmer Press, 1996.CARPENTER, J. P., DANIERE, A. G.; TAKAHASHI, L.M. Cooperation, trust, and social capitalin Southeast Asian urban slums.Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, vol. 55,p. 533-551, 2004.CLERCQ, D.; M. DAKHLI.Human capital, social capital, and innovation : a multi-countrystudy. Brussels, Belgium, Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School, p. 1-41, 2003.COCHRANE, P. Exploring cultural capital and its importance in sustainable development,Ecological Economics , vol. 57, n.2, p. 318-330, 2005.COLEMAN, J. Social capital in the creation of human capital.American Journal ofSociology, 94, p. 95-120, 1988.COLEMAN, J.Foundations of social theory. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1990.COSTA, N. M. C. da; NEIMAN, Z. R.;COSTA, V. C.Pelas Trilhas do Ecoturismo . SoPaulo: Editora Rima, 2009.COSTANZA, R. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital.Nature, p. 253-260, 1997.DASGUPTA, P.; SERAGELDIN, I. (Eds.).Social capital: A multifaceted perspective.Washington: The World Bank, 2000.DIWAN, I.; SIRKER, K. Towards competitive and caring societies in the Middle East and NorthAfrica. Selections from the Mediterranean development forum: Knowledge and skills fordevelopment in the information Age - Mediterranean development forum I. Marrakech,Morocco, World Bank Group, 1997.DOWLING, R.K. Oceania (Australia, New Zealand and the South Pacific).In: WEAVER, D. B.(Ed.),The Encyclopedia of Ecotourism . Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing, 2001, p.139-154.DRUMM, A.; MOORE, A.Ecotourism development : A manual for conservation planners andmanagers: An introduction to ecotourism planning, second edition, vol.2, The NatureConservancy, Arlington, Virginia, USA, 2005.EDWARDS, B.; FOLEY, M. W. Civil society and social capital beyond Putnam.AmericanBehavioural Scientist, vol. 42, p. 124-139, 1998.




21/24

FALK, I.; HARRISON, L. Community learning and social capital: Just having a little chat.Journal of Vocational Education and Training , vol.50, n.4, p. 609627, 1998.FALK, I.; KILPATRICK, S. What is social capital? A study of interaction in a rural community.Sociologia Ruralis, vol. 40, n.1, p. 87-110, 2000.GOSSLING, S. Ecotourism and Global Environmental Change.In: HIGHAM, J. (Ed.),CriticalIssues in Ecotourism . Oxford, UK: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, 2007, p. 70-84.HALL, C.M. Scaling ecotourism: the role of scale in understanding the impacts of ecotourism.In: HIGHAM, J. (Org.),Critical Issues in Ecotourism: Understanding a complex tourismphenomenon. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2007, p. 243-255.HALL, C.M.; BOYD, S.Tourism and nature-based tourism in peripheral areas: Development or disaster. Clevedon: Channelview Publications, 2005.HAWKEN, P., LOVINS, A.; LOVINS, H.Natural capitalism: creating the next industrialrevolution. Boston, Little: Brown and Company, 2000.

HIGHAM, J.E.S.Critical issues in ecotourism: Understanding a complex tourismphenomenon. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, 2007.HONEY, M. Ecotourism and sustainable development: Who owns paradise? Washington.D.C.: Island Press, 1999.HUANG, F. Social trust, cooperation, and human capital, Singapore Management University, mimeo, p.1-36, 2003.JONES, S. Community-based ecotourism: The significance of social capital.Annals ofTourism Research, vol. 32, n.2, p. 303-324, 2005.JONES, T.; WOOD, D. Calculating the tourist expenditure generated by natural and heritageareas: The valuing places toolkit. Conference proceedings, Tourism: Past Achievements,

Future Challenges, 11/02/2007. Sydney, Australia: University of Technology, 2007.JUDGE, R. Social Capital - building a foundation for research and policy development. PolicyResearch Initiative - Feature Articles, Government of Canada.Policy Research Initiatives 6,2003.KAUFMAN, H. F. Toward an interactional conception of community.Social Forces , vol.38,n.1, p. 8-17, 1959.KINKER, S.Ecoturismo e Conservao da Natureza em Parques Nacionais . So Paulo:Papirus, 2002.KITAMURA, P.C.A Amaznia e o desenvolvimento sustentvel . Braslia: EMBRAPA,1994.KOKA, B.R.; PRESCOTT, J.E. Strategic alliances as social capital: A multidimensionalview.Strategic Management Journal , 23, p. 795-816, 2002.LAI, P. H.; NEPAL, S. K.Local perspectives of ecotourism development in TawushanNature Reserve, Taiwan.Tourism Management, vol.27, n.6, p.1117-1129, 2006.LAMNEK, S. Qualitative Sozialforschung. Bd. 2. 3.Aufl. Psychologie Verlags Union.Munchen, Weinheim, 1995.




22/24

LEME, F. B. M.; NEVES, S. C. Planejamento, Turismo e Cultura: O Contato com o Outrocomo Fator de Sustentabilidade para Movimentos Identitrios.In : VILA, M. A. (Org.)Polticae Planejamento em Cultura e Turismo . Ilhus, BA: Editus, Editora da UESC, 2009, p.181-

208.LESSA, R.Amaznia: As razes da destruio. So Paulo: Atual Editora Ltda, 1991.LIMA, I. B. de.Deforestation in Amazonia and local environmental governance . Tese demestrado no publicada, School of International Relations, The University of Japan, Yamato-Machi, 2002.LIMA, I. B. de.The macro geopolitics of ecotourism: competing discourses andcollaboration in New Zealand and Brazil. Tese de doutorado no publicada, The Universityof Waikato, Hamilton, NZ, 2008.LINDBERG, K.; HAWKINS, D. E.Ecoturismo: Um Guia para Planejamento e Gesto. SoPaulo: SENAC, 2001.

LOZANO, J., GOMEZ, C.; REY-MAQUIEIRA, J. An analysis of the evolution of tourismdestinations from the point of view of the economic growth theory, FEEM Nota di Lavoro,2006.MELLO, de M. Ecoturismo no Ambiente do Cerrado e Movimentos Sociais.In : ALMEIDA, M.G. (Org.)Paradigmas do Turismo . Goinia: Editora Alternativa, 2003, p. 51-60.MITCHELL, C. (1998). Entrepreneurialism, commodification and creative destruction: A modelof post-modern community development.Journal of Rural Studies , 14, p. 273286, 1998.MULDERA, K., ERICKSONB, J.; COSTANZA, R. The contribution of built, human, social annatural capital to quality of life in intentional and unintentional communities.EcologicalEconomics, vol. 11, 2005.

NEIMAN, Z.; MENDONA, R.Ecoturismo no Brasil . Barueri: Manole, 2004.NEIMAN, Z.; RABINOVICI, A. (Orgs).O Turismo e o Meio Ambiente no Brasil. So Paulo:Manole, 2009.PAGE, S.; DOWLING, R.K.D. Ecotourism. Themes in tourism. New York: Prentice Hall, 2001.PANELLI, R. Rural health and wellbeing.In: Bock, B.B.; Shortall, S. (Eds.),Rural GenderRelations. Oxfordshire UK: CABI Publishing, p. 317-344, 2006.PEARCE, D. G.Tourism development . London: Longman, 1989.PERKINS, H. Commodification : re-resourcing rural areas. In: CLOKE, P.; MARSDEN, T.;MOONEY, P. (Orgs.),Handbook of Rural Studies. London: SAGE, 2006.

PINTO, L.F.Amaznia: no rastro do saque. So Paulo: HUCITEC, 1980.PONCHIROLLI, O.O Capital humano como elemento estratgico na economia dasociedade do conhecimento sob a perspectiva da teoria do agir comunicativo .Florianpolis, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina: Engenharia de Produo: 78, 2000.PRETTY, J.; FRANK, B. R. Participation and social capital formation in natural resourcemanagement: achievements and lessons, procedimentos para Conferncia Landcare 2000, 6-9 March, Melbourne, 2000.




23/24

PRETTY, J.; WARD, H. Social capital and the environment.World Development, vol. 29, p.209-227, 2001.PUTNAM, R. D. Bowling alone: Americas declining social capital.Journal of Democracy ,vol. 6, p. 65-78, 1995.PUTNAM, R. D. Social capital: measurement and consequences.Canadian Journal ofPolicy Research , vol.2, n.2, p. 41-52, 2001.PUTNAM, R. D. (Ed.).Democracies in Flux: The evolution of social capital in contemporarysociety. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.REDCLIFT, M. Sustainable Development (1987-2005): An Oxymoron Comes of Age.Sustainable Development , Vol. 13, No. 4, 2005, pp. 212-227.ROCKTAESCHEL, B. M. M.Terceirizao em reas Protegidas : Estmulo ao Ecoturismo noBrasil. So Paulo: Editora Senac, 2006.RODRIGUES, A. B. (Org.)Ecoturismo no Brasil : Possibilidades e Limites. So Paulo: Ed.Contexto, 2003, 136p.ROE, D.; PAGE, C. A.; MEYER, D. Tourism and the poor: Analysing and interpreting tourismstatistics from a poverty perspective. PPT partnership working paper, 16, ODI, IIED and CRT,London, 2004.RUSCHMANN, D. V. de M.Turismo e Planejamento Sustentvel: A Proteo do MeioAmbiente. Campinas, SP: Papirus, 1997.SARANTAKOS, S.Social research. Melbourne: Macmillan Education, 1993.SCHALLER, D.T. (1996). Indigenous Ecotourism in the Ecuadorian Amazon: A case study.University of Minnesota, USA. Disponvel em: http://www.geog.umn.edu. Acesso: 01/11/2007.

SCHEYVENS, R. Ecotourism and the empowerment of local communities.TourismManagement, vol. 20, n. 2, p. 245-249, 1999.SCHEYVENS, R.Tourism for development: Empowering communities . New York:Prentice Hall, 2002.SILVEIRA, I. Ecoturismo: etnodesenvolvimento e incluso social no Amazonas.Revista deTurismo y Patrimnio Cultural, vol.3, n.1, p. 63-77, 2005.SNUC Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservao , Lei n 9.985, 18 de julho de2 0 0 0 . D i s p o n v e l e m : < h t t p : / / w w w. m m a . g o v. b r / s i t i o / i n d e x . p h p ?ido=conteudo.monta&idEstrutura=240>. Acessado em: 28 of April, 2011.SOBEL, J. Can we trust social capital?Journal of Economic Literature , v. 50, p.139-154,

2002.SOUZA, A. M.; CORREA, M. V. M.Turismo: Conceitos, Definies e Siglas. Manaus:Editora Valer, 2000.STEDMAN, R. C. Sense of place and forest science: Toward a program of quantitativeresearch, Forest Science , vol. 49, p. 822-829, 2003.STRONZA, A.; GORDILLO, J. Community views of ecotourism.Annals of TourismResearch , vol.35, n.2, p. 448-468, 2008.




24/24

STROOMBERGEN, A., ROSE, D.; NANA, G. Review of the statistical measurement of humancapital, Statistics New Zealand, p. 1-56, 2002.TALBOT, L.; WALKER, R. Community perspectives on the impact of policy change on linkingsocial capital in a rural community.Health and Place, vol.13, n.2, p. 482-492, 2007.TOCANTINS, L.Amaznia: Natureza, homem e tempo. Rio de Janeiro: Editora CivilizaoBrasileira S.A, 1982.WEARING, S.; NEIL, J. Ecotourism: Impacts, potential and possibilities. Oxford, UK:Butterworth Heinemann, 1999.WEAVER, D. B. The encyclopedia of ecotourism . New York: CABI Publishing, 2001a.WEAVER, D. B. Ecotourism . Melbourne: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd, 2001b.WOESSMANN, L. Cross-country evidence on human capital and the level of economicdevelopment: The role of measurement issues in education.Historical Social Research , vol.27, n. 4, p. 47-76, 2002.WOOLCOCK, M. (1998). Social Capital and economic development: Toward a theoreticalsynthesis and policy framework.Theory and Society, vol. 27, n.2, p. 151-208.YIN, R. K.Case study research: design and methods . California: Sage Publications, 1994.

Endnotes: The president of the Association of Marip, Ascopram, Isaac as well as MariaIsolina, Raimundo, Raimundinho, Manduca, e Beto. The Ibamas staff and the coordinator ofthe Tapajs/Arapiuns-Tapajoara Associations Organization, Cleida Santos, also contributedsignificantly with the research by providing updated information in November 2010.

Acknowledgments:The fieldwork in Amaznia was part of a doctoral study fully sponsored

by the New Zealand Agency for International Development (NZAID), managed by the Ministryof Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT). The authors also thank the support and attention givenby the New Zealand Embassys staff in Brasilia, in particular to Mrs. Helosia Fontes, policysupport officer.

Ismar Borges de Lima: Universidade Federal de GoisEmail: [email protected] para o currculo Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/1226725450970361

Anne-Marie d'Hauteserre: University of Waikato, New ZealandEmail: [email protected] para o currculo: http://www.waikato.ac.nz/wfass/staff/gtep/adhautes

Data de submisso: 19 de janeiro de 2011.

Data do aceite: 30 de abril de 2011.



ecotourism social and human capitals and identity in tapajos brazil

Documents